15 min read
Carnegie Mellon University researchers found that name, image and likeness (NIL) rules are making college football fairer by allowing athletes to earn money through endorsements. The study shows NIL has led to wider talent distribution across programs, benefiting more student-athletes...
In a groundbreaking study that challenges conventional wisdom about Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation in college athletics, researchers from Carnegie Mellon University have discovered that NIL rules are actually making college football more competitive and fair—directly contradicting the widely held belief that NIL would only benefit elite programs and create a "rich get richer" scenario.
The research, conducted by Tim Derdenger from CMU's Tepper School of Business and Ivan Li at the Jindal School of Management at the University of Texas at Dallas, provides the first comprehensive data-driven analysis of NIL's impact on competitive balance in college football. Their findings have significant implications for athletes, universities, policymakers, and the future of collegiate sports.
For decades, the NCAA prohibited college athletes from profiting from their name, image, and likeness. This policy, ostensibly designed to preserve amateurism and competitive balance, meant that universities and the NCAA generated billions of dollars from college sports while athletes received nothing beyond scholarships.
Everything changed following the Supreme Court's landmark decision and subsequent pressure from state legislatures. In July 2021, the NCAA finally implemented new rules allowing student-athletes to:
Critics immediately predicted that NIL would exacerbate competitive imbalances, with wealthy programs using superior NIL opportunities to monopolize top talent. The Carnegie Mellon research reveals a very different reality.
Derdenger and Li analyzed multiple seasons of college football recruiting data, comparing recruiting patterns before and after NIL implementation. Their research examined:
The researchers employed sophisticated statistical models to isolate NIL's impact from other confounding factors like conference realignment, coaching changes, and COVID-19 disruptions.
The most significant finding directly contradicts the "rich get richer" hypothesis. Instead of concentrating at a handful of elite programs, top-tier talent is now distributed more broadly across college football.
"Our findings clearly show that NIL is not just about the top institutions; it's empowering a broader range of schools to compete for elite talent, directly benefiting more student-athletes," explained Ivan Li.
The research identifies several mechanisms driving this distribution:
1. Market Size and Demographics Matter
A 5-star quarterback might earn more NIL money at a school in a large metropolitan area (even at a mid-tier program) than at a traditional powerhouse in a small college town. Market access for endorsements and business opportunities often trumps brand prestige.
2. Playing Time Economics
Elite athletes recognize that sitting on the bench at Alabama or Ohio State limits their ability to build their personal brand and secure lucrative NIL deals. Starting immediately at a smaller program can be more financially attractive.
3. Entrepreneurial Athletes
The most business-savvy athletes evaluate total compensation packages—scholarship value plus NIL potential—rather than just program prestige. This creates opportunities for creative programs with strong business connections.
4. Geographic Advantages
Programs in states with favorable NIL legislation or strong collective support can compete effectively, regardless of historical success or conference affiliation.
NIL has fundamentally transformed the power dynamics in college athletics recruitment. Athletes now enter the recruiting process with significantly more bargaining power and decision-making autonomy.
Pre-NIL, athletes primarily considered:
Post-NIL, athletes now additionally evaluate:
The study found particularly interesting patterns among 3-star recruits—good players who aren't considered elite prospects. Many of these athletes now prioritize NIL earning potential over traditional academic prestige.
"They're more likely to pick programs where they can earn money, even if the school isn't as strong academically," the researchers found. "This shows how much NIL has changed the way athletes make decisions, giving them more control to choose what matters most to them, whether that's financial gain, athletic goals or other priorities."
This represents a fundamental shift in athlete decision-making—from primarily institutional fit to holistic economic opportunity assessment.
Perhaps the most exciting finding for fans and the sport overall: NIL is making college football more competitive and unpredictable.
The researchers used multiple metrics to assess competitive balance:
Point Spreads:
Sportsbooks—which use sophisticated algorithms and vast data to set accurate betting lines—have tightened point spreads for games involving programs that have improved their recruiting through NIL. Even when accounting for roster changes, transfer portal activity, and coaching, the data shows more games with competitive point spreads.
Outcome Unpredictability:
More upsets and closer games across college football suggest that talent distribution is creating genuine competitive balance, not just the appearance of it.
Championship Contenders:
A broader set of programs now have the talent level necessary to compete for conference championships and playoff berths.
"We've observed a tangible shift in competitive dynamics," Tim Derdenger noted. "These data speak volumes: NIL makes college football a more exciting and less predictable sport, which is a win for everyone involved."
The research findings have important implications for various groups within college athletics:
Based on their findings, Derdenger and Li offer several recommendations for policymakers and athletic administrators:
NIL opportunities should be available across all schools and divisions. Programs that lack NIL infrastructure should receive support to establish collectives and business partnerships, preventing a new form of competitive imbalance.
The NCAA and conferences should create clear, consistent rules for NIL deals. Ambiguity creates uncertainty for athletes, schools, and businesses, potentially limiting NIL's positive effects.
Universities should be required to provide comprehensive education about:
Ongoing research should track NIL's effects on:
While NIL has improved competitive balance in aggregate, disparities remain. Policymakers should examine and address:
The Carnegie Mellon research has profound implications for the athlete-to-entrepreneur transition:
Current college athletes are receiving real-world business experience that previous generations never had:
Athletes entering the NIL era are better prepared for post-playing business careers than any previous generation. They're learning:
Despite the positive findings, challenges remain:
Some worry that NIL opportunities might distract athletes from academic pursuits. Universities must ensure student-athletes maintain academic progress while pursuing NIL opportunities.
Balancing athletics, academics, and NIL business activities requires sophisticated time management. Athletes need support systems to manage these competing demands.
High NIL earnings can create pressure and heightened expectations. Mental health support becomes even more crucial as athletes navigate commercial success alongside athletic performance.
While competitive balance has improved, individual equity issues persist:
The Carnegie Mellon research provides an evidence-based foundation for understanding NIL's trajectory:
Professionalization Continues: College athletics will increasingly resemble professional sports, with agents, sophisticated contracts, and commercial partnerships.
Market Maturation: As the NIL market matures, we'll see standardization of deals, emergence of specialized service providers, and more sophisticated valuation methods.
Technology Integration: Blockchain, NFTs, and AI will create new NIL opportunities and platforms for athlete monetization.
International Expansion: International student-athletes will increasingly leverage global markets for NIL opportunities.
The Carnegie Mellon University research fundamentally challenges the dominant narrative about NIL's impact on college athletics. Rather than creating a "rich get richer" scenario that concentrates talent at elite programs, NIL has democratized college football by:
As Tim Derdenger concluded: "NIL makes college football a more exciting and less predictable sport, which is a win for everyone involved."
For current athletes, this research validates the opportunities NIL provides—not just for immediate income, but for long-term business education and career preparation. For aspiring athlete-entrepreneurs, NIL represents a training ground for the business skills they'll need long after their playing careers end.
The data is clear: when given the opportunity to control their own economic destinies, athletes make choices that benefit not just themselves but the entire sport. NIL isn't destroying college football—it's making it better, fairer, and more competitive than ever before.
And for those worried about the commercialization of college sports, the research offers a counterpoint: commercialization was already here. NIL simply ensures that athletes—the ones actually generating the value—finally get to participate in the economic benefits their talents create.
Have questions or need additional support?
Our sales and experienced support teams will get back to you within 24 hours.
Sales/Support Email
Info@AthleteToMogul.com
